Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/OmarGhridaBot

The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA. The result of the discussion was Withdrawn by operator.

OmarGhridaBot

• (BRFA
• Approved BRFAs
• talk
• contribs
• count
• SUL
• logs
• page moves
• block log
• rights log
• flag)

Operator: Omar Ghrida (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 21:39, Sunday, July 15, 2018 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Python (Pywikibot)

Source code available: no

Function overview: Pages Maintenances

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s):

Estimated number of pages affected:

Namespace(s):all namespaces

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): yes

Function details:

1. Fixes double redirects
2. deletes tag broken redirects for speedy deletion
3. add portals to articles
4. Adds missing tag and references section if needed
5. Adds missing {{reflist}} template to article if needed .
6. add template {{orphan}} to pages are currently unlinked by other pages.

Discussion

Overview

Just a few thoughts/questions regarding the tasks proposed:

• Xqbot and AvicBot already deal with double redirects. Is a third bot necessary?
• What is a "broken" redirect? How is a non-admin bot going to delete it?
• How will it determine which portals to place?

I'm most curious/concerned about the second one, to be honest. Primefac (talk) 23:11, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

@Primefac: Thank you for your comment, first for "double redirect", I don't know if there is a policy that refuses to work bots for the same task, but Maybe I agree with you in this . Second, for "broken redirect" .. Of course by candidates for speedy deletion , and finally, Add portals will be via Equivalent portals from "frwiki" and "itwiki" and via Categories With a specific algorithm. --Omar Ghrida (talk) 12:26, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

When you say 'with a specific algorithm' - can you give details of the algorithm you'll be using? ƒirefly ( t · c · who? ) 20:31, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Indeed, that was sort of what I was hoping to find out. Also, re: my question about broken redirects - are you saying that your bot would simply tag "bad" redirects for {{db-g6}} deletion? Primefac (talk) 13:27, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

@Firefly: for add portals: if the article hasn't portal link, the bot Will search at the equivalent article in frwiki and itwiki,then it will add portal link. Or if the name of article and category have identical name it will search if there is a portal for example here. @Primefac: yes for all pages existent in Special:BrokenRedirects, Do you see a problem in this task? . Thanks to all --Omar Ghrida (talk) 16:56, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Um... that's not how a portal works. Putting {{portal bar|france}} at Nice links to Portal:France, not fr:Nice. Primefac (talk) 17:21, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Mr @Primefac:, I mean here Method of Category, in category:Nice exist template portal, and template "coord" of geography exist in the article. But if there is an error in this Maybe I do not use it. and I Use only Equivalent portalss method. thank you --Omar Ghrida (talk) 18:16, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

This collection of items need to be evaluated separately, suggesting numbering them as Task numbers 1 through 4. For #2 (deletes broken redirects) - this is denied as not possible for non-admins to run admin bots. Do you mean to have it "tag for deletion" as suggested by @Primefac: above? — xaosflux ^Talk 19:41, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: yes OK, I did. for #2 exactly You can see the last 10 changes here in Test Wikipedia but Maybe I can undo this task if an error will happen. --Omar Ghrida (talk) 20:23, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

OK, I made sections below for each of the tasks you would like to perform. — xaosflux ^Talk 21:10, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Task 1 (Fix double redirects)

• Will you be working off of Special:DoubleRedirects, or something else? — xaosflux ^Talk 21:12, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: exactly I'll just work for Special:DoubleRedirects. --Omar Ghrida (talk) 14:24, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Task 2 (tag broken redirects)

• Will you be working off of Special:BrokenRedirects, or something else? — xaosflux ^Talk 21:12, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

exactly I'll just work for Special:DoubleRedirects. --Omar Ghrida (talk) 14:24, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Do you mean Special:BrokenRedirects? SQL^{Query me!} 00:00, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I meant it, Sorry there was an error in the link --Omar Ghrida (talk) 14:47, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Task 3 (add portals to articles)

Please make 5 of these edits with your own account and post the diffs below to better demonstrate what you will be doing here. — xaosflux ^Talk 21:15, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

OK -- Edit 1 - Edit 2 - Edit 3 - Edit 4 - Edit 5 ///// But I canceled this task At present, because there was a previous objection in the field about adding portals to all articles. I will open a new discussion in near future for this task.--Omar Ghrida (talk) 14:24, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Task 4 (Adds missing tag and references section if needed)

What do you mean be "tag" here? — xaosflux ^Talk 21:15, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

I mean reference tag Which is used in the reference paragraph . It Replaced by {{reflist}}, so his task has been canceled but I will work on something similar (see task 5) --Omar Ghrida (talk) 14:24, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Task 5 (Adds missing {{reflist}} template to article if needed )

Ex: Here . I will add {{reflist}} template to article if needed . --Omar Ghrida (talk) 14:24, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Q1 What are the exact criteria that define if the reflist template is needed? SQL^{Query me!} 00:00, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

A1 The template would be placed before the next sections:( External links - See also - Notes) and It would be placed in the next section if it does not exist: References.

So, if I understand correctly, it will look for the text ==References== on the page, and add a ==References==\n{{reflist}} if it is not found? SQL^{Query me!} 23:54, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Q2 Will it also add the "References" heading if not present? Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:25, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

A2 Yes it was supposed to create if it did not exist.

Task 6 ( add template {{orphan}} to pages are currently unlinked by other pages)

Ex: Here I want to work on this task by add template {{orphan}} to pages are currently unlinked by other pages, you can see Wikipedia:WikiProject Orphanage --Omar Ghrida (talk) 14:24, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

General

@Omar Ghrida: please stop adding more tasks to this - it is best to get your process running smoothly and add more tasks after. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:22, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: OK, so 3 tasks enough? --Omar Ghrida (talk) 10:49, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

The 4 you have listed so far are OK, getting this omnibus request approved is going to take long enough though. — xaosflux ^Talk 11:15, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: ok thank you :

1. Fix double redirects
2. tag broken redirects
3. Adds missing {{reflist}} template to article if needed .
4. add template {{orphan}} to pages are currently unlinked by other pages.

I will work on these tasks .--Omar Ghrida (talk) 11:33, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

I'm opposed to #1. Xqbot and AvicBot capably fix double redirects, a third bot would likely be overkill/waste of server resources. No opinion on 2, 3, or 4. -FASTILY 05:36, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Not sure if we need a bot for #2 - there are only a handful of links there, also I note EmausBot fixes some broken links, and the majority of the current broken links are cross-space from sandboxes to Draft, and should probably be deleted.. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:23, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Withdrawal

• @SQL: I'm sorry, I want to cancel the request Because I do not have time now .. I will create a new request again later thanks. .
  • I apologize - I hadn't seen this, by the time I asked another question. Withdrawn by operator. SQL^{Query me!} 23:56, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA.